Classical Methods for the Identification and Susceptibility Testing of Bacteria
Bacteria are classically identified by their ability to utilize different substrates as a source of carbon and nitrogen through the use of biochemical tests such as the API20E™ system (bioMérieux). For susceptibility testing, clinical microbiology laboratories use methods including disk diffusion, agar dilution and broth microdilution. Although identifications based on biochemical tests and antibacterial susceptibility tests are cost-effective, at least two days are required to obtain preliminary results due to the necessity of two successive overnight incubations to identify the bacteria from clinical specimens as well as to determine their susceptibility to antimicrobial agents. There are some commercially available automated systems (i.e. the MicroScan system from Dade Diagnostics Corp. and the Vitek system from bioMérieux) which use sophisticated and expensive apparatus for faster microbial identification and susceptibility testing (Stager and Davis, 1992, Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 5:302-327). These systems require shorter incubation periods, thereby allowing most bacterial identifications and susceptibility testing to be performed in less than 6 hours. Nevertheless, these faster systems always require the primary isolation of the bacteria as a pure culture, a process which takes at least 18 hours for a pure culture or 2 days for a mixed culture. The fastest identification system, the autoSCAN-Walk-Away™ system (Dade Diagnostics Corp.) identifies both gram-negative and gram-positive bacterial species from standardized inoculum in as little as 2 hours and gives susceptibility patterns to most antibiotics in 5.5 hours. However, this system has a particularly high percentage (i.e. 3.3 to 40.5%) of non-conclusive identifications with bacterial species other than Enterobacteriaceae (Croizé J., 1995, Lett. Infectiol. 10:109-113; York et al., 1992, J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:2903-2910). For Enterobacteriaceae, the percentage of non-conclusive identifications was 2.7 to 11.4%.
A wide variety of bacteria and fungi are routinely isolated and identified from clinical specimens in microbiology laboratories. Tables 1 and 2 give the incidence for the most commonly isolated bacterial and fungal pathogens from various types of clinical specimens. These pathogens are the most frequently associated with nosocomial and community-acquired human infections and are therefore considered the most clinically important.
Clinical Specimens Tested in Clinical Microbiology Laboratories
Most clinical specimens received in clinical microbiology laboratories are urine and blood samples. At the microbiology laboratory of the Centre Hospitalier de l'Université Laval (CHUL), urine and blood account for approximately 55% and 30% of the specimens received, respectively (Table 3). The remaining 15% of clinical specimens comprise various biological fluids including sputum, pus, cerebrospinal fluid, synovial fluid, and others (Table 3). Infections of the urinary tract, the respiratory tract and the bloodstream are usually of bacterial etiology and require antimicrobial therapy. In fact, all clinical samples received in the clinical microbiology laboratory are tested routinely for the identification of bacteria and susceptibility testing.
Conventional Pathogen Identification from Clinical Specimens
Urine Specimens
The search for pathogens in urine specimens is so preponderant in the routine microbiology laboratory that a myriad of tests have been developed. However, the gold standard remains the classical semi-quantitative plate culture method in which 1 μL of urine is streaked on plates and incubated for 18-24 hours. Colonies are then counted to determine the total number of colony forming units (CFU) per liter of urine. A bacterial urinary tract infection (UTI) is normally associated with a bacterial count of 1 CFU/L or more in urine. However, infections with less than 107 CFU/L in urine are possible, particularly in patients with a high incidence of diseases or those catheterized (Stark and Maki, 1984, N. Engl. J. Med. 311:560-564). Importantly, approximately 80% of urine specimens tested in clinical microbiology laboratories are considered negative (i.e. bacterial count of less than 107 CFU/L; Table 3). Urine specimens found positive by culture are further characterized using standard biochemical tests to identify the bacterial pathogen and are also tested for susceptibility to antibiotics. The biochemical and susceptibility testing normally require 18-24 hours of incubation.
Accurate and rapid urine screening methods for bacterial pathogens would allow a faster identification of negative specimens and a more efficient treatment and care management of patients. Several rapid identification methods (Uriscreen™, UTIscreen™, Flash Track™ DNA probes and others) have been compared to slower standard biochemical methods, which are based on culture of the bacterial pathogens. Although much faster, these rapid tests showed low sensitivities and poor specificities as well as a high number of false negative and false positive results (Koening et al., 1992, J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:342-345; Pezzlo et al., 1992, J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:640-684).
Blood Specimens
The blood specimens received in the microbiology laboratory are always submitted for culture. Blood culture systems may be manual, semi-automated or completely automated. The BACTEC system (from Becton Dickinson) and the BacTAlert system (from Organon Teknika Corporation) are the two most widely used automated blood culture systems. These systems incubate blood culture bottles under optimal conditions for bacterial growth. Bacterial growth is monitored continuously to detect early positives by using highly sensitive bacterial growth detectors. Once growth is detected, a Gram stain is performed directly from the blood culture and then used to inoculate nutrient agar plates. Subsequently, bacterial identification and susceptibility testing are carried out from isolated bacterial colonies with automated systems as described previously. The bottles are normally reported as negative if no growth is detected after an incubation of 6 to 7 days. Normally, the vast majority of blood cultures are reported negative. For example, the percentage of negative blood cultures at the microbiology laboratory of the CHUL for the period February 1994-January 1995 was 93.1% (Table 3).
Other Clinical Samples
Upon receipt by the clinical microbiology laboratory, all body fluids other than blood and urine that are from normally sterile sites (i.e. cerebrospinal, synovial, pleural, pericardial and others) are processed for direct microscopic examination and subsequent culture. Again, most clinical samples are negative for culture (Table 3).
Regarding clinical specimens which are not from sterile sites such as sputum or stool specimens, the laboratory diagnosis by culture is more problematic because of the contamination by the normal flora. The bacterial pathogens potentially associated with the infection are purified from the contaminants and then identified as described previously. Of course, the universal detection of bacteria would not be useful for the diagnosis of bacterial infections at these non sterile sites. On the other hand, DNA-based assays for species or genus detection and identification as well as for the detection of antibiotic resistance genes from these specimens would be very useful and would offer several advantages over classical identification and susceptibility testing methods.
DNA-Based Assays with any Clinical Specimens
There is an obvious need for rapid and accurate diagnostic tests for bacterial detection and identification directly from clinical specimens. DNA-based technologies are rapid and accurate and offer a great potential to improve the diagnosis of infectious diseases (Persing et al., 1993, Diagnostic Molecular Microbiology: Principles and Applications, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.). The DNA probes and amplification primers which are objects of the present invention are applicable for bacterial or fungal detection and identification directly from any clinical specimens such as blood cultures, blood, urine, sputum, cerebrospinal fluid, pus and other type of specimens (Table 3). The DNA-based tests proposed in this invention are superior in terms of both rapidity and accuracy to standard biochemical methods currently used for routine diagnosis from any clinical specimens in microbiology laboratories. Since these tests are performed in around only one hour, they provide the clinicians with new diagnostic tools which should contribute to increase the efficiency of therapies with antimicrobial agents. Clinical specimens from organisms other than humans (e.g. other primates, birds, plants, mammals, farm animals, livestock and others) may also be tested with these assays.
A High Percentage of Culture Negative Specimens
Among all the clinical specimens received for routine diagnosis, approximately 80% of urine specimens and even more (around 95%) for other types of clinical specimens are negative for the presence of bacterial pathogens (Table 3). It would also be desirable, in addition to identify bacteria at the species or genus level in a given specimen, to screen out the high proportion of negative clinical specimens with a test detecting the presence of any bacterium (i.e. universal bacterial detection). Such a screening test may be based on the DNA amplification by PCR of a highly conserved genetic target found in all bacteria. Specimens negative for bacteria would not be amplified by this assay. On the other hand, those that are positive for bacteria would give a positive amplification signal with this assay.
Towards the Development of Rapid DNA-Based Diagnostic Tests
A rapid diagnostic test should have a significant impact on the management of infections. DNA probe and DNA amplification technologies offer several advantages over conventional methods for the identification of pathogens and antibiotic resistance genes from clinical samples (Persing et al., 1993, Diagnostic Molecular Microbiology: Principles and Applications, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.; Ehrlich and Greenberg, 1994, PCR-based Diagnostics in Infectious Disease, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Boston, Mass.). There is no need for culture of the bacterial pathogens, hence the organisms can be detected directly from clinical samples, thereby reducing the time associated with the isolation and identification of pathogens. Furthermore, DNA-based assays are more accurate for bacterial identification than currently used phenotypic identification systems which are based on biochemical tests. Commercially available DNA-based technologies are currently used in clinical microbiology laboratories, mainly for the detection and identification of fastidious bacterial pathogens such as Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae as well as for the detection of a variety of viruses (Podzorski and Persing, Molecular detection and identification of microorganisms, In: P. Murray et al., 1995, Manual of Clinical Microbiology, ASM press, Washington D.C.). There are also other commercially available DNA-based assays which are used for culture confirmation assays.
Others have developed DNA-based tests for the detection and identification of bacterial pathogens which are objects of the present invention: Staphylococcus spp. (U.S. Pat. No. 5,437,978), Neisseria spp. (U.S. Pat. No. 5,162,199 and European patent application serial No. EP 0 337 896 131) and Listeria monocytogenes (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,389,513 and 5,089,386). However, the diagnostic tests described in these patents are based either on rRNA genes or on genetic targets different from those described in the present invention.
Although there are diagnostic kits or methods already used in clinical microbiology laboratories, there is still a need for an advantageous alternative to the conventional culture identification methods in order to improve the accuracy and the speed of the diagnosis of commonly encountered bacterial infections. Besides being much faster, DNA-based diagnostic tests are more accurate than standard biochemical tests presently used for diagnosis because the bacterial genotype (e.g. DNA level) is more stable than the bacterial phenotype (e.g. metabolic level).
Knowledge of the genomic sequences of bacterial and fungal species continuously increases as testified by the number of sequences available from databases. From the sequences readily available from databases, there is no indication therefrom as to their potential for diagnostic purposes. For determining good candidates for diagnostic purposes, one could select sequences for DNA-based assays for (i) the species-specific detection and identification of commonly encountered bacterial or fungal pathogens, (ii) the genus-specific detection and identification of commonly encountered bacterial or fungal pathogens, (iii) the universal detection of bacterial or fungal pathogens and/or (iv) the specific detection and identification of antibiotic resistance genes. All of the above types of DNA-based assays may be performed directly from any type of clinical specimens or from a microbial culture.
In our co-pending U.S. Ser. No. 08/526,840 and PCT (PCT/CA/95/00528) patent applications, we described DNA sequences suitable for (i) the species-specific detection and identification of 12 clinically important bacterial pathogens, (ii) the universal detection of bacteria, and (iii) the detection of 17 antibiotic resistance genes. This co-pending application described proprietary DNA sequences and DNA sequences selected from databases (in both cases, fragments of at least 100 base pairs), as well as oligonucleotide probes and amplification primers derived from these sequences. All the nucleic acid sequences described in this patent application enter the composition of diagnostic kits and methods capable of a) detecting the presence of bacteria, b) detecting specifically the presence of 12 bacterial species and 17 antibiotic resistance genes. However, these methods and kits need to be improved, since the ideal kit and method should be capable of diagnosing close to 100% of microbial pathogens and antibiotic resistance genes. For example, infections caused by Enterococcus faecium have become a clinical problem because of its resistance to many antibiotics. Both the detection of these bacteria and the evaluation of their resistance profiles are desirable. Besides that, novel DNA sequences (probes and primers) capable of recognizing the same and other microbial pathogens or the same and additional antibiotic resistance genes are also desirable to aim at detecting more target genes and complement our earlier patent application.